Re: [Idr] optional transitive

iLya,

As I read it:

The draft only deals with malformed attributes. So it doesn't apply

To deal with optional attributes that are recognized, you have to refer to 
specific RFC/describing the specific attribute. For some attributes, it 
may be ok to reset, for others not. RFC4271:6.3 won't tell you what to do 
about an attribute that it's not defined there.

Unfortunately, this part is often missed.

2c,

-Juan

On Tue, 20 Sep 2011, iLya wrote:

> Hi Robert,
>
> --------------------------------------------------
>> Do you think that the below draft still does not formally address the 
>> problem you are describing ?
>> 
>> http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-idr-optional-transitive-03
>> 
>
> it goes in the right direction but stops short of saying whether recognised 
> optional transitive attribute (partial or not) properly formed but out of 
> context (e.g. L3VPN-specific attribute in global table) is an error or not. 
> If authors of draft-ietf-idr-optional-transitive-03 consider the problem I've 
> described to be within scope of the draft and could address it more 
> explicitly, that would do.
>
> Cheers,
> iLya
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Idr mailing list
> Idr@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/idr
>
>

Re: [Idr] optional transitive - recognised but out of context